Talk:Åland Islands

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Echo has identified Åland Islands as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Czech language Wikipedia.

This Geography article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale (comments).

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finland, a WikiProject related to the nation of Finland. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (comments)

	Åland Islands is within the scope of the Åland Islands WikiProject, dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of Åland Islands. For more information, see and join the project.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

This page has been cited as a source by a media organization. The citation is in:

"The Register: Letters: Surveys are tosh, and so's your reporting.", The Register, April 28, 2004. (details)

[edit] Old discussions

See also talk:Aland Islands.

The topic "Holidays" should be removed. The holidays are not specific to the Aland Islands. -FredrikM

[edit] Economy part

The part where it says "The main ports are Mariehamn (south), Berghamn (west) and Långnäs on the eastern shore of the Main Island." is incorrect, neither Berghamn nor Långnäs are on the main island. Berghamn is on Eckerö and Långnäs is on Lumparland. Also, wouldn't it be better to move this sentence to the geography section of this article? Falalaaa (talk) 13:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Land border

Is there any land border with Sweden on Åland? — Insta ntnood 10:22, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

Nope!

Åland consists solely of islands.

There is a sea border over open water.

--Johan Magnus 07:47, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. The borderless country article says it has a 10-metre border with Sweden on the Island of Märket. Perhaps that's wrong. — Insta ntnood 23:20, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

No, no, you are right, Instantnood.

But it's that kind of knowledge that really no-one cares about.

Sweden happends to include a couple of acres (I don't remember exactly how many, 3-4, maybe) on the skerry Market Reef (Märket) that is divided in two rather equally sized halves between Sweden and Finland.

It's intresting for a few factoids:

Since it's only a skerry, it doesn't influence borders for territorial water and so on.
Due to the isostatic uplift the length of the skerry has increased with almost 100 metres since it was sectioned in the Treaty of Fredrikshamn.
The skerry has a lighthouse that was built on orders of the Russian tsar in the mid-19th century. Unfortunately, it got build on the wrong side of the border which came to produce bureaucratic headache a century later when it was discovered.
The skerry is so shallow that it get drenched in rough sea. If it hadn't been for the (unmanned) lighthouse, it had barely been recognized as more than a rock touching the surface of the sea.
The light house is a weather station, and therefore the name Märket is read in the weather report four times a day, every day. But it's just a name, and possibly a point on the map - people don't know anything about it. And there is very little to know.
In 1985 the border on the island was in fact revised, so that Finland and Sweden switched a dozen square metres, or so, in order to get the light house on Finnish territory. Since then the border goes like a maze and is much longer than 10 metres.
Some people would argue that Märket doesn't belong to Åland since the Finnish half is in fact governed directly from Helsinki and considered no different than the islands and skerries that are located closer to Mainland Finland. It's disputable if Märket's Finnish half belongs to any Finnish province at all, but that doesn't matter since humans can not live there. I would guess that Finns (and Swedes) would solve any further upcomming problems with 100% bureaucratic pragmatism.
The Swedish and Finnish post-1809 governments are notorious for chosing different preferred translations to foreign languages. While the Finns in English speak of Market Reef for the location of their lighthouse, the Swedes speak of Market Island for their part of the rock. This is nothing but ridiculous, but that's how things work up here.

--Family Olofsson 23:11, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

There is no legal dispute whether the Finnish part of Märket belongs to Åland or mainland Finland; it's Åland. Only the lighthouse is maintained by Merenkulkulaitos (Finnish Maritime Administration). --Oami 12:50, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. :-D — Insta ntnood 02:12, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

Ooops! I admit that I'd forgotten about Märket.

But, can't we save my face by agreing that "some people" do not count it to Åland.

Please!

:-))

I consider to make an article with, basically, the content from above. I hope that's OK.

Thanks, BTW.

--Johan Magnus 20:53, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

:-D good idea. — Insta ntnood 00:59, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation

How is the title of this article pronounced? -- Beland 04:53, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Merriam-Webster says "Oh-lan". The d is optional. --Menchi 21:18, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

not really correct. With an English tongue it would sound like 'aw-lah-nd' ('aw' as in 'law'). I've never heard it pronounced with a mute d. --Matle 21:18, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Maybe X-SAMPA /o:land/ or similar.

I agree with 'aw-lah-nd' and /o:land/. The d is never mute. I should know, I was born and raised on the Åland Islands Nappilainen 14:47, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I propose that the sentence "(Åland is pronounced /'ɔː.læn/or /'ɔː.lænd/ in English.)" is removed and replaced with "Åland is pronounced X-SAMPA /o:land/." I see no reason to give an english, and incorrect at that, version of the pronunciation. Unless somebody expresses a differing opinion I shall change this shortly. --Nappilainen 14:38, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Being that this is the English wikipedia, I think providing an English pronounciation is acceptable, especially because for most people. Åland (or Aaland, in an anglicized spelling as my last name is) is a difficult word to pronounce. Additionally, I think it works because we similarly do not pronounce other countries (Mexico, France, Cuba, Germany, etc.) in the manner of their native languages (i.e. Mejico). Perhaps we should provide both and follow the format of other geographic areas. --hotdiggitydogs 20:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, of course. Sounds very reasonable. Will you do the edit? --Nappilainen 12:54, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Collation

Where should this article appear in an alphabetical list? I am inclined to change all the Categories to put |Aland in them so that it appears in A rather than after the end of the alphabet. I would, of course, spider through the other articles doing the same for Östergötland etc. — PhilHibbs | talk 08:41, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Depends on by which alphabet you're going by - Take a look at the Finnish & Swedish alphabets for references and of course the letters Å, Ä and Ö

[edit] geography section

I don't know where the idea comes from (ancient Britannica article?) that the islands are mostly sandy. I have been there often enough, also having visited many of the smaller and uninhabited islands and they are most definitely rocky. The main island has flat and possibly sandy portions, but that can not be said of the archipelago as a whole. Kosebamse 13:34, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] demilitarized

What should be changed in the Åland page is that it is only demilitarized during peace time, not during war time...

[edit] History

The article doesn't seem to link to its own history article: History of Åland. -- Domino theory 20:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Attitude of Sweden following plebicite of 1917

A really good article. I have three comments:

I've read somewhere that one of the main reasons for the Swedish Government not pushing harder for inclusion of Åland in Sweden following the plebicite in 1917 supporting this, was that the Swedish (non-Socialist) government felt sympathy for the victorious White side in the Finnish civil war. This sounds like something that could be useful in improving the readers' understanding of the events around the plebicite. Does anyone have a source on this issue?

I've never heard anything about alleged irregularities in the plebicite. Are there any references/sources here? Otherwise, I think the comment should be removed.

I've never heard anything about "Swedish disrespect for Åland's demilitarised status in the 1930s". What was this about? Could someone please inform me.

Osli73 21:01, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that the one who put the question up to the League of Nations was the social democrat Hjalmar Branting. By letting the league decide, he practically gave it to Finland. The reason for him doing so was that he was a big supporter of the league, and thought that it was important to let it solve internationall conflicts peacfully. He recieved to nobel price for his work in the league. But it is possible that the earlier right wing government felt sympathy with the whites - I think we are both right.

I suppose that its the Stockholm plan (I think thats what they called it) thats the 1930's thing is all about. Before World War II, there were discussions between Finland and Sweden to fortifie Åland, to prevent it from being taken by the Soviet Union or Germany in the event of war. (This never happend when the war broke out.) The plan was abolished after heavy protests from Soviet (who was a signatary of the Åland convention and thereby had the right to protect Ålands demilitarised status) and from the people of Åland as well.

The history section is a bit one-sided and really doesnt get it all right all the time, even though its not a catastrohpy. Maybe Ill do some work on it sometime when I got the time for it...

--Screensaver 21:57, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] .ax domain

Ive changed note number 5 in the infobox from "To be introduced in march 2006" to "Introduced in august 2006", since it was delayed but is now inplace. It would be interesting to make an article about the TLD, since it has been quite a big fuss about it. Finland has used all its bureacy to fight it and delay it.

Some not should be made as well that aland.fi is still in use, and there are no plans to remove it as far as I know.

--81.225.78.144 18:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Post WWI history

There is quite a need of improving the history section of this article with what has happend after the settlement in the 20s. Some things worth to write about would be:

Ålands relation to Finland during the years.
The expansion of Ålands automy, and disputes with Finland over the same. (Stamps, coins and notes, taxes, fishing etc)
Ålands relation with the EU, and the EMU, and how it affects the automy.

Im not complainging about the article, its very well written and informative. Im just higlighting some interesting topics to work more on. Ill try to write something myself.

--81.225.78.144 18:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Finnish language schools forbidden??

The Demographics section says:

Finns are not allowed to own land, and Finnish-language schools are forbidden.

This is really weird. Such thing in the middle of Europe? I understand that there may be some ethnic tensions, but that sounds like too much.

Someone, please check it. --Amir E. Aharoni 09:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, i corrected it myself per [1]. But please check my edits. --Amir E. Aharoni 09:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

The section still needs tweaking. You are allowed to own property. A flat of your own and land less than 4000 sq m even without regional citizenship. 213.204.61.136 19:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I cant confirm the exact facts, but I think I can explain some of the confusion. People who are not Åland citizens are not alound to own land on Åland. That includes Finns, as well as Swedes or any other nationality. Its not a racist thing aimed at the Finns. The reason for the law is that otheerwise german tourists would by all the land and the prices would go so high that people originally from Åland wouldnt have a chance living there. The place is really beutifull and attractive to tourists - it would be a perfect place for a summerhouse. To prevent this from happend, foreigners are not allowed to won land. You can rent an appartment, however.

Im not sure about the schools, but it dosent seem so odd to me. Åland is swedish speaking to 100%. There are more people speaking finnish in Sweden than it is on Åland... Swedish is the only official language. Therefore, I guess, all educations is supposed to be in swedish, and not finnish or english or spanish. Its the same way in sweden - education have to be mainly ins swedish in swedish schools (or at least I think so).

So, this has nothing to do with ethnic tensions or racism - its completely normal. Åland is, on the contrary, an remarkable example of how conflicts with ethnic minorities can be solved peacfully.

--Screensaver 21:49, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

"Åland is swedish speaking to 100%" actually, article itself claims 5,0%, the very same number than there are Swedish-speakers in whole Finland. The discriminating language/land policys are indeed racistic.

Wikinist 22:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC) The numbers are well above 90%, and the land ownership issue is like Screensaver tried to explain - something that fennophiles always seem to misunderstand or misuse on purpose in their propaganda. --62.78.246.132 07:16, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I meant 5,0% Finnish-speakers in Åland, of course. 100% - 5% is not 100%. And German tourists haven't been a "threat" for decades, but that doesn't really matter. What does, is that Åland doesn't respect its 5% minority as they do in mainland with Swedish-speakers. And please don't refer to me as a Fennophile or propagandist. Or should I assume that EU commission is Fennophilistic too for raising an accusation for unequality in Åland among ethnical groups in 2004?

Wikinist 01:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

First of all, the alleged discrimination taking place can hardly be characterised as "racist" given that it isn't on account of race.

Second of all, [2] quoted by Amir above states that "the official language of the authorities in the Islands, the Province and its municipalities, is Swedish. However, a citizen of Finland may use Finnish before a court of law or Ålandic officials in Åland in matters concerning the citizen personally. The language of instruction in publicly financed schools is Swedish, but an Ålandic municipality is free to provide teaching of Finnish."

Third of all, if anything, the regional citizenship is discriminatory against non-Finlanders, given that you need to be a Finnish citizen to be eligible to hold regional citizenship in the first place.

As for "as they do in mainland with Swedish-speakers" and speaking of commissions, [3] cites a report by the Council of Europe criticising Finland, stating that the "committee's critique concerns [the state of] bilingualism in everything from judicial system and social services and healthcare to the activities of emergency stations. However, the situation is somewhat better on the education front" (translation mine).

Let's dial down the rhetoric a wee bit, shall we (and that goes for accusations of fennomania and racism alike). -- NordicStorm (t/c) 14:20, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] In Finland, not in Sweden

Åland has been mentioned twice in Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Link Recovery as being in Sweden. Nowhere in the article is this claimed. On the contrary, it says right there in the introduction that it's in Finland. Do people just glance at the map or flag and immediately conclude it must be in Sweden? Or do they think it's still 1808 and all Finland is in Sweden? JIP | Talk 13:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Location maps available for infoboxes of European countries

On the WikiProject Countries talk page, the section Location Maps for European countries had shown new maps created by David Liuzzo, that are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed soon at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish two things:

whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions),
which new version (with of without indicating the entire European Union by a separate shade) should be applied for which countries.

Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 19 Feb 2007 00:21 (UTC)

[edit] Expansion

Why is this page tagged for expansion? Seems pretty good to me. Mbisanz 13:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject Finland

WikiProject Finland has a poll about naming convention regarding the names of municipalities in Åland. --Drieakko 17:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Etymology of 'Åland'

I removed Drieakko's reference to "many linguists" saying that the name 'Åland' is of Germanic origin. Does Virrankoski actually say "many linguists"? Can you provide a verbatim citation?

I also deleted Driekko's suggestion that perch is a freshwater-only fish, as the perch in the Archipelago Sea would be very surprised to learn that they're not supposed to be there.

Similarly, I deleted the unsourced claim that 'ahven(a)' comes from *ahva. Or is this from Virrankoski?

As far as I know, there is no consensus as to where Åland got its name, and there are obvious political reasons to assert that the name is of Germanic origin. However, if Driekko or someone else can prove that this is indeed the prevalent view among linguists, I naturally have no problem with it. Victor Chmara 01:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. Prolog (talk) 15:56, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Åland → Åland Islands — General and traditional usage in English, United Nations recognises the autonomous province as "Åland Islands" [4], Finnish state (in English texts) [5]. Anyway, I sort of have already thought it's obvious that it is Åland Islands in English, since Åland doesn't really tell anything to an English-speaker. Oh, and please don't refer anything to Swedish grammar, it has nothing to do with the recognised name in English. —Pudeo ⺮ 13:02, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Google; only English web pages: 'Åland' (not including where the word part of the latter name) vs. "Åland Islands"; 413 000 - 1 170 000. --Pudeo ⺮ 11:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Support --Pudeo ⺮ 13:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Support - no brainer. It's not controversial as Myanmar/Burma, and it is the officially recognised name. Will ^(talk) 13:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Support per WP:COMMONNAME but it seems that the political entity is often referred to simply as Åland even in English. Since the islands and regime share an article, this should be made clear in the lead. — AjaxSmack 01:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Neutral For two reasons: 1) as Ajax mentioned, the political entity is usually referred to as simply "Åland" and 2) it's an unnecessary move in my opinion, equivalent to moving e.g. Azores to Azores Islands. Anyway, moving to "Åland Islands" doesn't seem to bring any harm. Hús ö nd 04:06, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME: Åland is more common in English than Åland Islands. Timeineurope 01:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Support. Åland Islands seems to be more common than just Åland (in English). --Zundark (talk) 21:31, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Support per Zundark and AjaxSmack. feydey (talk) 22:57, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Weak Oppose I seem to find that just plain Aland is more common. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 19:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Oppose - In my experience, "Åland" works just fine. In fact, I can't remember the last time I heard (verbally) the "Islands" tagged on to the end. - fchd (talk) 17:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Support. The English language atlases and encyclopaedias that I have looked at, all use "Islands" in name. – Axman (☏) 06:00, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Any additional comments:

Husond, as it seems Azores is still abit different case. It is clearly entitled as Azores Autonomous Region. However, Åland Islands is a region and province at the same time. Some Ålanders even seem to find being a province offensive, as it would breach the autonomy. Finnish Wikipedia has different articles for province and region, but English Wikipedia does not. This article seems to be focusing on the region part, as seen in the Swedish/Finnish names. Then there is no well established name for it, "Region of Åland" isn't much used, unlike Landskapet Åland / Ahvenanmaan maakunta. Also, judging from the lead, it does not seem to focus on the political entities, but on the islands. --Pudeo ⺮ 10:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't be ridiculous Timeineurope. Your claim is based on? Just a quick Google search (English only, "Åland" [not including where Åland is part of 'Åland Islands'] vs. Åland Islands: 413 000 vs 1 170 000. Many of those "English-language" sites which have only Åland are in fact in Swedish still, but yet is less used. --Pudeo ⺮ 11:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I googled 'Åland' – English only – and checked the first 350 results.

Google's estimates for how many hits a search has turned up are completely unreliable – they can be off by hundreds of thousands of hits. I once had Google estimate that a search had turned up 'about 1,460,000' results, but when I looked through all the results, it turned out there were only a thousand. Google's estimates are usually way too high. Try for instance to google the exact phrase "shia lebuff" (a misspelling of Shia LaBeouf). When I do that, Google estimates that the search yielded 'about 2,160' hits. If I click my way through the results, however, it turns out there are only 278.

Timeineurope 20:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

So, what's your argument for going against United Nations which uses "Åland Islands" in any context? By the way, since we're using the Internets, ISO 3166 code .ax officially refers to "ÅLAND ISLANDS" according to ISO as well. [6] --Pudeo ⺮ 20:36, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME. Timeineurope 21:09, 18 November 2007

The UN and ISO also use things like "United Republic of Tanzania", but do we use that as the article name? No of course not. - fchd (talk) 17:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

They are already used as the official name. Just like Finland is "officially" Republic of Finland, but it isn't in the title. I'm not proposing to renaming it to "Åland Islands Province" or anything. --Pudeo ⺮ 18:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I would hazard a guess that "Azores" is used without "Islands" because it includes the English plural +s. While XXXX-land is also a common English toponym form, Åland might not conceived that way because the "Å" is so short. Again, just a guess. — AjaxSmack 07:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

I miss description of tourism in Aaland jmak (talk) 05:18, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Washington protests

Isn't this exactly the sort of thing we would need independent news coverage for? I'm not saying it didn't happen (as the source given requires registration, I have not been able to check it), I'm just saying that if nobody outside Wikipedia has yet thought that the event was important, then we shouldn't make the call, per WP:NOT#JOURNALISM. -- Jao (talk) 12:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

It's silly to add such things to a province level article with sources like Facebook and some Icelandic site that can't be entered without registration. If information about separatist activities should be added, Future of Åland (Ålands framtid) political party should be mentioned, not some demonstrations in USA. But for fairness it should be mentioned that all other political parties respect the 1920 treaty of Åland Islands' autonomy. --Pudeo ⺮ 13:39, 7 May 2008 (UTC)